Canada Follows Australia's Lead

[GeoffH]

30 minutes ago, manofthecoldland said:

I know the UK and Australians have a different set of time-related coverage limitations if you are abroad for extended periods of time. You can lose your coverage and have to meet new qualifiers to have your benefits re-instated. 

Australians living overseas lose their 'Medicare' coverage in Australia after living as an overseas resident after 5 years maximum, it can happen sooner as a 'Medicare card' has a maximum expiry date of 5 years from the date of issue and I am told that you have to be in Australia and are supposed to be a resident (for taxation purposes) to renew one.  There is a 2 year residence time frame before one again becomes eligible for medicare coverage (and exiting Australia during that 2 years can reset the timer).

It is a significant concern and one reason a friend of mine worked so hard to get permanent residency for his filipino wife.

 

Edited March 25, 2019 by GeoffH

[KC813]

8 hours ago, Reboot said:

Sure hope they don't pull this in US. We pay into SS our whole lives, it's supposed to be ours no matter where we choose to live!

The U.S. does track departures, although the U.S. Social Security Administration did not make use of the data -- until now!

According to an SSA  announcement two weeks ago in the Federal Register, travel outside of the U.S. has some effect on Title II, XVI and XVIII benefits. Maybe someone here knows what benefits they are talking about!

In an effort to combat a cause of improper payments, we are establishing the Travel and Border Crossing system to collect information about applicants, beneficiaries, and recipients under Titles II, XVI, and XVIII who have had absences from the United States (U.S.). Currently, we rely on individuals to self-report their foreign travel. Oftentimes, we do not receive these reports or we receive them untimely, which results in improper payments. In general, we suspend Title II benefits to aliens who remain outside of the U.S. for more than six consecutive calendar months. We generally suspend Title II benefits to both U.S. citizens and non-U.S. citizens who travel to a country where payment is restricted by the U.S. Additionally, we suspend Title XVI payments to both citizen and non-citizen recipients who are outside of the U.S. for a full calendar month or 30 consecutive days or longer.

[hk blues]

28 minutes ago, KC813 said:

The U.S. does track departures, although the U.S. Social Security Administration did not make use of the data -- until now!

According to an SSA  announcement two weeks ago in the Federal Register, travel outside of the U.S. has some effect on Title II, XVI and XVIII benefits. Maybe someone here knows what benefits they are talking about!

In an effort to combat a cause of improper payments, we are establishing the Travel and Border Crossing system to collect information about applicants, beneficiaries, and recipients under Titles II, XVI, and XVIII who have had absences from the United States (U.S.). Currently, we rely on individuals to self-report their foreign travel. Oftentimes, we do not receive these reports or we receive them untimely, which results in improper payments. In general, we suspend Title II benefits to aliens who remain outside of the U.S. for more than six consecutive calendar months. We generally suspend Title II benefits to both U.S. citizens and non-U.S. citizens who travel to a country where payment is restricted by the U.S. Additionally, we suspend Title XVI payments to both citizen and non-citizen recipients who are outside of the U.S. for a full calendar month or 30 consecutive days or longer.

A quick Google says - Title II is disability - not needs based; Title XVI is disability - needs based; Title XViii is Medicare.

[Dave Hounddriver]

The problem with Canada's approach is they are changing the rules for people who have already done their financial planning for the rest of their life.

When I retired there was a set of rules in place that I counted on to balance my budget to spend the rest of my life in the Philippines.  The Canadian government's constant tinkering with their rules now makes it impossible for me to plan a retirement that will keep me funded for the rest of my life in the Philippines.  I shall have to either return to Canada and suck the government tit, or skirt around the rules and try to pull a fast one or live here at below poverty levels.  I did not figure on the rule changes when I retired.  I thought that our government would grandfather in those who had already retired.  Not in my case.  All of my Canadian buddies who are still working past age 70 because the "cannot afford to retire" are thrilled that I may have to return home.  People hate to see someone beat the system and live the dream.  Crab mentality exists in Canada.

[Clermont]

Dave, Australia in January past a law in Parliament that all new arrivals have to be in the country for 3 years before they access any Commonwealth benefits. The onus is on the sponsor of the visa to supply financial support, pensions paid on retirement are a percentage of time spent in Australia, it takes a non Australian 30 years of work to be eligible for a full pension. Medicare, how ever is paid on arrival, depending on what visa they arrive on, seeing the sponsor is a tax payer and all eligible dependents go under his care. Sorry, tourist visa's don't fall into that visa category. Medicare is not paid for in any country outside Australia, get travel insurance for that.

As for reductions in pensions: Australia pays a lot of add on bonuses, ( sneaky way of boosting the pension up to make it look livable to the world ) but after a set period of time these are taken off you, some at six weeks, others range out to twenty six weeks, until the flat no frills pension is paid.

There has been years of talk about scrapping pensions for people not living in Australia, but with many thousands of Ozzie's living oversea's on old age pensions, what is Australia going to do with them when they return home, we have a problem housing the ones we have. It would be a foolish Government that tried to implement that law, then again,  as for disability pensions, there are rumors, ( only rumors, ) that they are cracking down on them outside Australia. Disability pensions can be paid to underage Ozzie's before being eligible for old age pensions, they are to be assessed under the new disability scheme that Australia has been trying to implement for a couple of years now.

Unemployment benefits are still payed overseas but for a set number of weeks.

I have a lot of reservations about the path Australia is heading down, but at the end of the day, I'd rather be able to spend a dollar a day than get a lot in the hand and be broke tomorrow. I'll just have to learn how to eat rice and not steaks. 

[bastonjock]

5 hours ago, Dave Hounddriver said:

The problem with Canada's approach is they are changing the rules for people who have already done their financial planning for the rest of their life.

When I retired there was a set of rules in place that I counted on to balance my budget to spend the rest of my life in the Philippines.  The Canadian government's constant tinkering with their rules now makes it impossible for me to plan a retirement that will keep me funded for the rest of my life in the Philippines.  I shall have to either return to Canada and suck the government tit, or skirt around the rules and try to pull a fast one or live here at below poverty levels.  I did not figure on the rule changes when I retired.  I thought that our government would grandfather in those who had already retired.  Not in my case.  All of my Canadian buddies who are still working past age 70 because the "cannot afford to retire" are thrilled that I may have to return home.  People hate to see someone beat the system and live the dream.  Crab mentality exists in Canada.

Feel for you on that one dave , makes me mad when i see the bone idle in my country who have never contributed to the economy and lived off welfare for most of their lives recieving the same or higher pensions than i will qualify for 

[bastonjock]

10 hours ago, hk blues said:

You don't get welfare benefits from the UK Government if you are living abroad.  You will still get the State Pension and one or two other minor benefits but most stop when you stop contributing into the SS system.  You will also fall out of the NHS (healthcare) system. The principle seems to be you remain covered as long as you are contributing, once you stop paying most benefits stop.  Fair or unfair - open to opinion I guess.  

I have no idea how they will be able to track your exits and entry's from the UK once you are of pensionable age , unless you are of poor health .

[Viking]

49 minutes ago, bastonjock said:

I have no idea how they will be able to track your exits and entry's from the UK once you are of pensionable age , unless you are of poor health .

Why would that be difficult?

[Viking]

10 hours ago, hk blues said:

You don't get welfare benefits from the UK Government if you are living abroad.  You will still get the State Pension and one or two other minor benefits but most stop when you stop contributing into the SS system.  You will also fall out of the NHS (healthcare) system. The principle seems to be you remain covered as long as you are contributing, once you stop paying most benefits stop.  Fair or unfair - open to opinion I guess.  

To me it sounds unfare  denying benefits to someone who have been contributing to the system for the biggest part of their lifes

[GeoffH]

17 hours ago, Dave Hounddriver said:

The problem with Canada's approach is they are changing the rules for people who have already done their financial planning for the rest of their life.

When I retired there was a set of rules in place that I counted on to balance my budget to spend the rest of my life in the Philippines. 

 

This has similarities to my situation and it is why I have been spending 6 months of the calendar year in Australia until I can change my investments.

When I retired there were particular rules around how land and property were taxed for citizens and non-citizens but various state governments have started treating non-resident citizens the same as non-citizens when it comes to land tax.  That created problems for me as my 2 investment properties in Australia were suddenly hit with a land tax increase amounting to about $10,000 per year.  In order to avoid that extra tax, since the regulation changed I've spent 6 months each year in Australia (that's the last 2 years).

I've thought about selling my Victorian properties and buying others in a state where these rules don't apply but they started in only 1 state and now they're in 4 states (including mine) so it's spreading and I suspect it's only a matter of time before the states without these rules implement them.  Also selling these properties and buying others would attract a 'stamp duty tax' which would hit me for $40 in every $1000 on purchase of the new properties... so pass on that.

I'm currently working towards divesting those investment properties and I'll look for somewhere else to invest my money.

 

Edited March 26, 2019 by GeoffH